Many who have been impatiently waiting for the document have now had what to say. Debates can continue, commentaries and opinion can flow, but the strange coincidence surrounding the publication of the report is something that leaves no one indifferent.

In effect, a French non-governmental organisation called “Comité Catholique contre la faim et pour le Développement”, (CCFD) has published its 2009 report which is sub-divided into three parts. Part One concerns countries where investigations on corruption by the CCFD have been conclusive. Part Two is on a list of countries that are under investigation while the third and last part talks of countries where no investigations have been opened, but where there are strong suspicions about corruption charges. Cameroon falls within the last bracket and in the table of contents, only the name of President Paul Biya is mentioned.

Without getting to further details in the CCFD report, another clear observation is that the entire document focuses on developing countries and Cameroon is being cited as a case of mere suspicion with a clear statement from the authors of the report that no investigation is yet underway. Why then the media campaign about suspects? What makes it difficult for the publishers to wait and open their investigations before even announcing – let alone publishing their intentions? Could the timing be innocent, given that President Paul Biya has embarked on an all out war against corruption in Cameroon with top notches of the regime being arrested and tried? Others are awaiting trial. Coincidently, a French journalist with over 30 years of professional experience just published a book, “Code Biya”, on President Biya and his stewardship as leader of Cameroon.

Coming out with the CCFD report at this time sounds strange. In all fairness, no one would argue with a religious NGO that has the wellbeing of the poor at heart. What is actually puzzling in the CCFD limelight on Cameroon is that early this month, some local press organs were expressing surprise and impatience that other Central African leaders had been indexed by the NGO and neither President Paul Biya nor Cameroon featured on the list of the accused. Three weeks later, the 2009 report of the NGO has been made public with only the Head of State as the main suspect against whom no investigations are yet opened.

Another bizarre coincidence is that in the list of suspected African leaders, there are the former Presidents of Côte d’Ivoire, Henri Konan Bedié and late Félix Houphouet Boigny. Curious enough, President Houphouet died decades ago and in 2009, CCFD is still holding him at the level of suspicion! What has been blocking the authors so far from carrying out and concluding their investigations? Moreover, for a country like Côte d’Ivoire that is resolutely moving towards stability, brandishing the spectre of corruption against its present or former leaders at this hour is reminiscent of sending them a bird of ill omen in broad delight. It doesn’t make sense coming back decades after a man’s death to talk of suspecting him of corruption. So if late President Houphouet is found to have embezzled, what will happen next?

Finally, it is mind boggling to imagine how some structures in the West that are expected to shun mediocrity and shed light on public opinion should take delight in openly attempting to destabilise countries which are enjoying peace and stability. This game of sorts appears so simple when Cameroonians sound gleeful about elements of intoxication that only gear at tarnishing the image of the country’s leadership. Most, if not all, elements cited in the CCFD publication are stories already heard of in Cameroon and ignored for want of substance. Coming back to such fickle instances smacks of sheer ill will and a wanton smear campaign.

It is certainly this lopsided view of facts that has caused the political class in Cameroon to be indignant about the CCFD report as attested by the spontaneous reactions published alongside this paper.